Detecting regime shifts in climate data – the modern warming regime ended in 1997

The Analysis of the Global Change using Hurst Re Scaling

S.I.Outcalt : Emeritus Professor of Physical Geography, University of Michigan

Abstract: Three data sets used to document the case for anthropogenic global warming were analyzed using Hurst Rescaling. The analysis indicated that a more likely interpretation of the data is that the observed linear trend in global temperatures is an artifact of regime shifts. The dramatic “hockey stick” trace, which began in 1976 accompanied by a major transition in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, ends at the onset of the 21st Century and might be better termed the modern warming regime. This regime was replaced by a pronounced cooling regime. These observations attenuate the demonic interpenetration of the linear trend in the historic global temperature data.

Introduction: Hurst Re Scaling or Integral Inflection Analysis is a simple operation which is used to detect regime transitions in serial data. Although it is seldom employed the technique of has been demonstrated to be extremely effective in the detection of regime shifts in serial data [Outcalt et.al.(1997), Runnalls and Oke (2006)]. The method is named in honor of H.E.Hurst, who used the extremes of the integral of deviations from the record mean of serial data to analyze persistence in time series. The method is based on the assumption that most natural data is composed of regimes ranging in scale for geologic epochs to turbulence. In this world view nature has a strongly fractal structure with serial regimes covering the entire range of space and time.

Implementation: Dplot software uses a variety of rapid operators to analyze serial data. A small group of operators are used in Hurst Re Scaling Analysis. These operators are the calculation of the integral trace or the cumulative deviations from the record mean, mean value subtraction, linear trend removal and normalization. The analysis begins with the subtraction of the record mean followed by integration. Inflections in the integral trace signal regime transitions. If several variables are used in the analysis they may be normalized and plotted on the same graph. Another informative integral trace can be produced by removing the linear trend before integration. This operation phase shifts the initial inflections but signals subsets of record that might be parsed and analyzed using simple integration after mean subtraction. Even in the case where the data is in deviations from the record mean initial mean subtraction ensures integral closure. Trend removal on integral traces before normalization insures that the normalized integral traces cover the entire range of zero to unity.

The Test Signal: Three sets GHCN, HadCRUT3 and NASA were used as test signals. These data signals are remarkably similar and are displayed as figure 1.

clip_image002

Figure 1. The three record used as a test signals.

Integration: Integral traces were calculated from the test signals. Two integrations were performed. The first integration was done after a second mean subtraction to assure integral closure and the second followed trend removal and mean subtraction. These traces are displayed as Figure 2.

clip_image004

Figure 2. The initial integration (open symbols) displayed strong inflections near the the major global climate transitions in 1936 and 1976, which were accompanied by major ocean circulation transitions. The integrals of departures from the linear trend (filled symbols) indicate a major transition in the last decade of the 20th Century.

Figure 2 suggests that the period from 1976 until the end of the record should be parsed for detailed analysis. The traces of the 1976-2008 segment of the record were integrated and normalized after mean subtraction. The traces resulting from these operations is displayed as Figure 3.clip_image006

Figure 3. These traces indicate that the modern warming regime ended in 1997.

Figure 3 indicates that a major transition occurred at the onset of the 21st Century. The global thermal response to this transition is somewhat muted. An inspection of the data displayed as Figure 1 shows only slight downturns near the end of the record in 2008. However, ground temperature data collected by Janke(2011) and analyzed by the author indicates a major shift from a warming to cooling regime in the early years of the 21st Century. This ground temperature data is based on the mean annual temperatures calculated from probes at 1 m intervals in three 6 m boreholes along Trail Ridge Road in Rocky Mountain Park, Colorado. The annual mean temperatures were calculated from hourly observations and are therefore extremely robust. The data were collected in mountain tundra terrain above treeline along an east / west ridge. The data from these boreholes is displayed as Figure 4.

clip_image008

Figure 4. Mean annual temperature profiles from Trail Ridge. The temperature inflection in BH2 profile is an artifact of the 1976 onset of modern warming. The Terzaghi equation makes it possible to estimate the overlying inflection dates. The upper inflections in all three boreholes indicate a dramatic transition from a warming to cooling regime in the early years of the 21st Century.

Figure 4 indicates a dramatic shift in the climate at Trail Ridge. Linear extrapolation if BH2 profile below 4 m to the surface yields an extreme minimal estimate of a 2C surface temperature drop. As disturbance profiles are parabolic [Terzaghi (1970)] the actual drop in surface temperature over the first decade of the 21st Century is probably more than double the conservative estimate in the realm of 4-6 C.

Conclusion: This short analysis indicates that an alternate model of climate change based on serial regime transitions rather than anthropogenic global warming is consistent with the results of the Hurst Re Scaling analysis.

References:

Janke,J.R.(2011) personal communication.

Outcalt,S.I., Hinkel, K.M.,Meyer,E . and Brazel,A.J.(1997) The application of Hurst rescaling to serial geophysical data. Geographical Analysis 29, 72-87.

Runnalls,K.E. and Oke,T.R.(2006) A technique to detect micro-climatic inhomogeneities in historical records of screen-level air temperature. Journal of Climate 19: 959-978.

Terzaghi,K (1970) Permafrost, J. Boston. Soc. Civil Eng. 39(1): 319-368

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

92 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
GlynnMhor
July 3, 2012 5:43 pm

I can’t claim to fully understand this, but it does seem to confirm analytically what is evident qualitatively, that the globe hasn;t been warming in over a decade.

Pamela Gray
July 3, 2012 5:52 pm

This meshes so well with Bob Tisdale’s work.

Rick Bradford
July 3, 2012 5:54 pm

But if we accept this analysis, I don’t see how we get to denounce and destroy capitalism.
/sarc

July 3, 2012 6:11 pm

The borehole data is interesting, but reflects surface temperatures, not near surface air temperatures. Surface temperatures are influenced by snow cover and solar insolation.
Like with decreasing Arctic ice, decreased snow cover will lead to more heat loss from the ground and climate cooling.

July 3, 2012 6:17 pm

“…the demonic interpenetration of the linear trend…”
Huh?

Crispin in Waterloo
July 3, 2012 6:48 pm

I believe there was a Canadian borehole study of a similar style that showed a 6 Deg C rise in the Arctic over the past 150 years. If ‘things go back’ it might mean a return to the earlier temperatures. Is it possible that during a cooling event, the Arctic might continue to warm as a follow-on from the ending of the ice age? If so the overall change will be different from the recent past (10k years).

Caleb
July 3, 2012 6:54 pm

Borehole data from a ridge in California?
Oh well, makes as much sense as boring holes in Bristlecones.

Tom in Indy
July 3, 2012 6:55 pm

The mainstream media won’t touch this. It does not fit thier agenda. The founders thought they established a system where a free press would prevent government from asserting its will over the populace. Unfortunately, the founders never envisioned a scenario where the press would be sympathetic to a totalitarian cause.

pat
July 3, 2012 7:17 pm

3 July: Guardian: Leo Hickman: Is it now possible to blame extreme weather on global warming?Wildfires, heatwaves and storms witnessed in the US are ‘what global warming looks like’, say climate scientists
VIDEO: ‘The odds are changing’: Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist at the US National Center for Atmospheric Research, discusses the relationship between weather extremes and global warming on PBS Newshour.
Hickman: I put this question to a number of climate scientists…
Kerry Emanuel, professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology…
Dr Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution, at the Met Office Hadley Centre…
Professor Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at the Penn State Department of Meteorology…
Dr Clare Goodess, senior researcher at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit…
Dr Doug Smith, who leads decadal climate prediction research and development at the Met Office Hadley Centre…
Michael Oppenheimer, professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School and Department of Geosciences…
Harold Brooks, head of the mesoscale applications group at Noaa’s National Severe Storms Laboratory…
Michael F. Wehner, staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory… http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/jul/03/weather-extreme-blame-global-warming?newsfeed=true
no prizes for guessing what the abovementioned “CAGW scientists” had to say.
back in the real world:
3 July: UK Daily Mail: Graham Smith: Washout summer could lead to rickets epidemic in children not exposed to regular sunlight needed to produce vitamin D
Dr Nicola Balch, an associate specialist in child health at the British Medical Association: ‘People need just 20 to 30 minutes of sun three or four times a week to ensure they get enough vitamin D, but obviously with our weather it can be impossible to get this.’…
The miserable weather has sparked calls from doctors for vitamin D to be added to foods and supplements rolled out nationally…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2168264/Washout-summer-lead-rickets-epidemic-children-exposed-regular-sunlight-needed-produce-vitamin-D.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
——————————————————————————–

Maus
July 3, 2012 7:23 pm

Anthropogenic Ice Age, obviously. Again.

pat
July 3, 2012 7:30 pm

anyone care to comment on this?
3 July: Fox News: Douglas Main: What’s behind the record heat?
Climate change?
The early heat waves of summer — following higher temperatures in spring and winter — could also be part of a pattern of climate change.
“It’s consistent with what we’d expect in a warming climate, but it’s hard to quantify any effect climate change might have on an individual event like this heat wave,” Crouch said.
While only one heat wave cannot by itself be linked to climate change, a significant increase in these types of events over time could be a hallmark of a warming planet. “An increasing frequency of heat waves —that’s one aspect of climate change you can point to,” Carbin said.
Over the past few years, daily record high temperatures have been outpacing daily record lows by 2-to-1 on average, according to the website Climate Central. A 2009 study found that if the climate were not warming, that ratio would be expected to be even. So far this year, there have been 40,113 high temperature records set or tied, compared with just 5,835 cold records, a ratio of about 7-to-1.
“This could be a harbinger of things to come,” Weber said
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/07/03/what-behind-record-heat/
——————————————————————————–

Ben U.
July 3, 2012 7:31 pm

These observations attenuate the demonic interpenetration of the linear trend in the historic global temperature data.

“demonic”? Maybe “devilish” was meant, in the sense of troublesome? or maybe it’s a typo?

Brian D
July 3, 2012 7:58 pm

Demonic interpenetration? He’s equating the linear trend to something that’s pornographic in nature?! LOL! LOL!

July 3, 2012 8:14 pm

Professor Outcalt:
I like the concept of this calculation.
Some questions though.
Besides the fact that we’ve trashed the continuity (and virginity) of the databases you ran the Hurst exponent series on; I am curious about the legitimacy of running this series on a generic (also frequently discontinuous and confusing) aggregate of methodically different world temp measurements. Wouldn’t it be better to use this exponent series on some validated long term temp records from specific locations? There’s no need to wade into the alligator choked swamp to contest the number of unknown beasts in the water. Especially when the keepers of those databases never seem to know exactly what goes into any particular aggregate.
Could you run this on the satellite measurements? I know you can’t get a very long time series from the satellite data, but it should be more trustworthy.
You’re trying stir the wrong pot Pat. See: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/03/the-kevin-trenberth-seth-borenstein-aided-fact-free-folly-on-the-usa-heat-wave/. The you can go crawl back under whatever you crawled out from under. I’d say rock, but I hate insulting innocent rocks. Perhaps something septic?

MattN
July 3, 2012 8:23 pm

Figure 3 appears to be a CuSum plot, but it is inverse to what I would expect it to be if it was cooling…

Paul Vaughan
July 3, 2012 8:25 pm

Many geophysical series show integral changepoints ~1945 & ~1976.
They’re coherent with Heliospheric Current Sheet (HCS) Earth-Crossing integral changepoints.
A. HCS Earth-Crossings:
http://i48.tinypic.com/2yydr92.png
B. HCS Earth-Crossing Integral:
http://i45.tinypic.com/2nbc3dw.png
There’s a whole branch of the solar-terrestrial-climate literature that went off the rails – raising decades of controversy – simply because B was either ignored or hidden. Whether ignorance or deception, bright forces are up against the ugly, dark side of human nature.
Best Regards to All.

Matthew R Marler
July 3, 2012 8:30 pm

Let’s see: first, we have data from a personal communication, with the methods of data collection poorly described. then, we have a totally impenetrable figure 4, with (a) no clear explanation of which variables are calculated and which variables are measured and (b) no clear explanation of which plotted variables are responses and which are antecedents; third, the diffusion equation contains no terms for seasonal variation in temperature (with freezing in fall and winter, thawing in spring and summer) or annual variation in rainfall, insolation, temperature or snow cover. Lastly, in the Hurst analyses and the core analyses, there are no comparisons of the calculated curves to some expectancies dependent on any models of random variation plus linear change (or any other model of change), that is, there is no hint of what is usually called “statistical significance”.
I’d recommend a substantial rewrite and resubmission.

Paul Vaughan
July 3, 2012 8:43 pm

atheok says (July 3, 2012 at 8:14 pm) wrote:
“There’s no need to wade into the alligator choked swamp to contest the number of unknown beasts in the water.”

That about sums up the current state of the climate discussion.

David Falkner
July 3, 2012 9:11 pm

The references are a little sketchy. And the post itself is pretty barebones. I am not the kind of person that has time to go look all of this stuff up. Given that our economy is based on specialization, I can only assume that Mosher will hold this against me while everyone else understandingly forgives. Still, a little more explanation is needed or this is just toilet paper floating in the septic tank of the internet. Sorry if that seems harsh, but it is totally forgettable.

Paul Vaughan
July 3, 2012 9:18 pm

Matthew R Marler (July 3, 2012 at 8:30 pm):
“[…] there is no hint of what is usually called “statistical significance”.

The model assumptions don’t hold, so why waste time generating meaningless p-values? Climate research is in the exploratory phase; it’s nowhere near the level of knowledge necessary to do meaningful inference. Too many turn a blind eye to this reality. I do hope you (& many others) will reconsider from the perspective of deeper fundamentals.
Matthew R Marler (July 3, 2012 at 8:30 pm):
“I’d recommend a substantial rewrite and resubmission.”

It’s a casual blog post written by a volunteer, not a formal document written by a well-paid employee with a guaranteed-secure pension. The distinction is day vs. night (real, animated grassroots vs. stuffy, yawn-inducing formality).
All a blog post has to do to succeed is stimulate the audience.
Whether applied well or not by the author of this particular article, the post draws attention to a very useful exploratory tool (that can also be used as a meaningful inferential tool in other contexts where inference model assumptions are tenable).
My concern is that we’re already severely short on climate blog articles about data exploration. Sometimes we go for weeks without anything interesting. If the bar is set artificially high for data exploration articles, we just get watered down in more (waste-of-time IMO) philosophy & politics.

Claude Harvey
July 3, 2012 9:20 pm

Such a technique assumes the data plots being analyzed are legitimate. After all the howling about how the major composite temperature records (other than satellite) are fatally flawed at best and fraudulent at worst, isn’t it colossally mendacious for readers to claim the subject analysis of those records means anything at all?

July 3, 2012 9:35 pm

pat says:
July 3, 2012 at 7:30 pm
anyone care to comment on this?
3 July: Fox News: Douglas Main: What’s behind the record heat?
Climate change?
The early heat waves of summer — following higher temperatures in spring and winter — could also be part of a pattern of climate change.
“It’s consistent with what we’d expect in a warming climate,…………
===================================================
Sure, it’s a ridiculous load of tripe. Every year since time began, some points on the earth break records. Every year, without exception. This is because there was never a time that some place didn’t have extreme weather. So, what the lunatics have been doing, is chasing an area with extreme weather and checking the records. Sure enough, some of them get broken. Recall, they said the same exact thing about the winter we had in Kansas a couple of years ago…. except they were cold records…… which, they said they expected. Well, so do I. It doesn’t have anything to do with a warmer world. In fact, the global temps this year have been well below the temps of 2010.
http://suyts.wordpress.com/2012/07/03/its-sooooooo-hot/
Personally, I find the opportunistic nature of these cretins, attempting to score points off of human suffering, a bit insulting, but insightful towards their character.

July 3, 2012 10:01 pm

“I am curious about the legitimacy of running this series on a generic (also frequently discontinuous and confusing) aggregate of methodically different world temp measurements. ‘
long ago on CA a couple of us played around with Hurst ( Im a fan) and these series. I think either stockwell or D hughes and I discussed it. mmm cant recall now. I was bothered by the fact that the index is a amalgamation of air temps and SST.. hmm two entirely different beasts.
The point being, it is one thing to compare the temperature index to itself to look at changes.
its quite another thing to analyze it as if it were physically meaningful.
OHC is physically meaningful.. the combination of air temps and SST.. hmm. not so sure.
That said, its always fun to play with methods.
In simple terms the temperature index is really beside the point when it comes to AGW.
we knew long ago, long before the index ever went up that GHGs will warm the planet.
And if the temperature index goes down, we will still know that GHGs will warm the planet.

noaaprogrammer
July 3, 2012 10:02 pm

2012 summer temperatures here in northwestern USA have been below normal while temperatures in states further south and eastward have been above normal, but only the hot temperatures and storms and forest fires and their possible connection to climate change are what is reported in the MSM. In the northwest, some people have replanted their gardens 3 times because the seeds rotted in the cold soggy soil.

Rolf
July 3, 2012 10:06 pm

This is ‘interesting’ and just as adequate as is the CAGW or even AGW or maybe GW.
Frankly this is just as scientific and valid as is the AGW reality.
One word, bullshit, but I am sure peer-reviewed.

1 2 3 4